Earlier this week, a crazed female politician improbably elected to office proposed a bill that would fine men for such acts as sexual self abuse and impose “restrictions” on vasectomies. While her reasoning in beyond specious and reveals both a deep self-loathing and an immense jealousy of men, and while some aspects would require the erection (so to speak) of a massively invasive totalitarian state literally observing men’s every move in public or private, as a Catholic, I am not, in principle, opposed to much of what she advocates for below. However, the logic behind these proposals is, quite literally, insane, and reveals a very great deal about how divorced from reality left-wing rhetoric has become.

The politician, not incidentally, is from Texas, showing that whatever benefits there are to being in the Lone Star State, we have a disturbing number of crazies:

House Bill 4260, titled “Man’s Right to Know Act,” would require men to pay $100 fee for masturbating each time; require someone seeking a vasectomy, Viagra prescription, or colonoscopy to receive an informational booklet (complete with artistic illustration of each procedure), undergo a digital rectal exam and rectal sonogram and wait 24 hours to get the prescription or procedure; and allow health professionals the right to withhold treatment based on “personal, moralistic, or religious beliefs.”

The bill intentionally draws from anti-abortion laws in Texas, including legislation mandating a 24-hour waiting period for women seeking an abortion and the requirement that during their initial consultation, women receive an error-filled booklet about the risks associated with the procedure.

Hah hah hah you’re soooo clever and funny! What a great way to send up those repressed Christofascists telling women what to do with their bodies!

Of course, you have to completely overlook the fact that, in the case of an abortion, it’s not just the woman’s body, but also the body of a life inside her, that is in question. And that tiny fact not only obliterates the “wit” of this “sendup,” it also makes things like a 24 waiting period seem rather like very much a bare minimum, instead of being some onerous imposition.

The supposed “errors” of the booklet, by the way, are only errors if one takes unsubstantiated and largely disproved pro-abort rhetoric as fact.

So we can see this is just more virtue signaling and point-scoring from the tribe that lives and dies by its standing within the great leftist herd. We can also see how the Left tries to equate the brutal murder by dismemberment or chemical scalding of an infant with a “routine procedure” like a colonoscopy.

And finally note how the radfem tries to portray very minor limitations on the wholesale murder of babies that occurs in our country as seemingly random, clumsy, and unrelated hoops that “good women seeking abortions” must jump through. The truth is, they no better, but have to pretend all objections to abortion are somehow insane.

But what about the fines for self abuse? Leaving aside the fact that monitoring and enforcement would require the creation of a Big Brother like police state, I would not mind at all seeing a broad cultural pushback against the normalization of porn use and self-abuse which has emerged over the last several decades. I also would like to see vasectomies not accompanied by stupid, unnecessary, persecutory procedures, but made completely illegal. Here I think the feminist errs, as I don’t think a lot of men have a burning desire to undergo the procedure, but generally do so only under heavy pressure from their spouse. At least, the 5, ahem, Catholic fathers I knew who had the procedure all done around the same time were more or less pushed into having it done by their wives.

What of Viagra? The commercials make watching most sports impossible, and much of the use is based on want, and not need. My preference would be to see it simply banned. At the very least, how about tying the procreative act, to, you know, procreation, and thus limiting the use of such chemicals – whose long term effects are still largely unknown – to those men in a position to father and responsibly raise young children, e.g., the married? There is also of course a unitive aspect to the act which is also only suitable for marriage.

So, see how reasonable I am? I can even find the good in the most unhinged, unserious proposals from the far left.